Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Why does Paul lie?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Aractus View Post
    I think Paul's been caught in a lie here, it's very clear what was going on.
    If it's so clear, why didn't the church leaders who canonized his work notice the lie? Why did the whole western world have to wait almost 2,000 years for you to catch it?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
      Yes, we understand your failure at reading comprehension. Repeating yourself doesn't make it any less of a failure.
      It is not a failure to comprehend, it is a plain lie.
      Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
        It is not a failure to comprehend, it is a plain lie.
        You're not supposed to accuse people of lying on this site. It upsets the mods, as you should well know.

        Furthermore, you're just plain wrong, as per usual, and Aractus is entirely correct in this instance.
        "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
        "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
        "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Doug Shaver View Post
          If it's so clear, why didn't the church leaders who canonized his work notice the lie? Why did the whole western world have to wait almost 2,000 years for you to catch it?
          I doubt I'm the first to have noticed this and never claimed to be. In terms of canonisation, the Jews and the early Christian church did not have the standard of truth that we expect today. Factual errors in their scriptures didn't bother them.

          The issue in this instance is that even if we think the supernatural may be possible, that explanation just doesn't fly. There is no way that Paul didn't learn about the Last Supper from the other early church leaders. He knew people such as Peter who were actually at that "Last Supper". I very much doubt that it actually happened on the the night before Jesus was crucified though, Paul simply says "on the night he was betrayed" which was probably earlier in the week. And for some reason, the early church apostles felt the need to turn it into a regular ceremony/ritual. But it wasn't instituted by Paul, he learned of it through the others. I don't know when they started celebrating it as a custom, but it was probably very early after some of the disciples such as Peter decided to keep Jesus' movement going, and was their way of remembering Jesus. It might have been started by the women in the early church, since at that time they met in houses and women traditionally prepared meals and had the run of the household.

          Claiming the credit for this early Christian ritual would not have flown well at all I don't think in Jerusalem. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Paul was ex-communicated from the "central" Jerusalem church - he does say that the other apostles no longer recognise him as an apostle. I think he's already splintered into a new religious group that is separate to the church led by James and Peter (and John and whoever else) that was completely destroyed along with Jerusalem by 70AD.
          Last edited by Aractus; 06-17-2017, 12:20 AM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Aractus View Post
            There is no way that Paul didn't learn about the Last Supper from the other early church leaders. He knew people such as Peter who were actually at that "Last Supper". I very much doubt that it actually happened on the the night before Jesus was crucified though, Paul simply says "on the night he was betrayed" which was probably earlier in the week. And for some reason, the early church apostles felt the need to turn it into a regular ceremony/ritual. But it wasn't instituted by Paul, he learned of it through the others. I don't know when they started celebrating it as a custom, but it was probably very early after some of the disciples such as Peter decided to keep Jesus' movement going, and was their way of remembering Jesus. It might have been started by the women in the early church, since at that time they met in houses and women traditionally prepared meals and had the run of the household.
            I think you are overlooking the possibility that the Last Supper was actually an invention of Paul.

            I suggest:
            1. There was no historical event corresponding to the Last Supper as we know it today, and the historical Jesus never uttered any words about bread and wine being his body and blood and never instituted any form of communal meal or remembrance of him.
            2. Paul had a spiritual vision in which Jesus revealed to Paul the idea of the Last Supper and of the Eucharist/Communion as we know it today, as he says in his letter (i.e. he is not lying).
            3. Paul spread that teaching around all the churches that he visited and founded.
            4. Such visions were a common way of early Christians learning 'facts' about Jesus and getting 'teachings' from Jesus.
            5. By the time the gospels were written, this idea of a Last Supper and Jesus saying words about the bread and wine being his body and blood were all but universal around the churches, thus the gospels included the event as fact, when it had in fact originated in Paul's vision.
            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              I think you are overlooking the possibility that the Last Supper was actually an invention of Paul.

              I suggest:
              1. There was no historical event corresponding to the Last Supper as we know it today, and the historical Jesus never uttered any words about bread and wine being his body and blood and never instituted any form of communal meal or remembrance of him.
              2. Paul had a spiritual vision in which Jesus revealed to Paul the idea of the Last Supper and of the Eucharist/Communion as we know it today, as he says in his letter (i.e. he is not lying).
              3. Paul spread that teaching around all the churches that he visited and founded.
              4. Such visions were a common way of early Christians learning 'facts' about Jesus and getting 'teachings' from Jesus.
              5. By the time the gospels were written, this idea of a Last Supper and Jesus saying words about the bread and wine being his body and blood were all but universal around the churches, thus the gospels included the event as fact, when it had in fact originated in Paul's vision.
              You're wrongly assuming, much like Carrier and Doherty, that Paul received all the information he has from a purported revelation of Jesus. The primary issue with that is that it's simply not true. "I received from the Lord" is a reworking of the idea that a tradition is received from Sinai. You're also vastly overestimating the importance of visions and revelations in the early church, which seems anachronistic at best.

              I'm not completely opposed to Pauline invention of the Last Supper, largely because it doesn't appear in John or the Didache. However, that's not a conclusive argument in my mind, especially in view of late first/early second century dates of the Didache.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                You're not supposed to accuse people of lying on this site. It upsets the mods, as you should well know.
                You are partially right. I should have supported my accusation. Aractus was given explicit correction. He is like a child who gets caught in the cookie jar and denies it. That is the basis of my accusation. And no, he is not right and he knows it. You also know it, or should if you knew as much about the Bible and Christianity as you falsely claim.
                Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Aractus View Post
                  I'm not pretending anything. The friend I was talking to agreed AFTER I showed him the verse that Paul did not learn about the last supper directly from the Lord, he had to have learned it from the other disciples. Their argument is that the verse can be interpreted to mean he received it from the Lord through the work of the other apostles. But that doesn't make sense, in that whole section in Corinthians Paul is asserting his own authority above that and separate to the other apostles. Plus that explanation is not taking the text for what it says, it's inserting a biased opinion into it to generate a new reading. Plus, it makes perfect sense that he would lie in this instance - they won't recognise him as an apostle, so he won't recognise them in return.
                  If you showed him the same cut up, little wonder. Can't play fair, has to cheat - and wonders why no one that actually reads the Bible takes him seriously.
                  "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                  "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                  My Personal Blog

                  My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                  Quill Sword

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Aractus View Post
                    I'm not pretending anything. The friend I was talking to agreed AFTER I showed him the verse that Paul did not learn about the last supper directly from the Lord, he had to have learned it from the other disciples. Their argument is that the verse can be interpreted to mean he received it from the Lord through the work of the other apostles. But that doesn't make sense, in that whole section in Corinthians Paul is asserting his own authority above that and separate to the other apostles. Plus that explanation is not taking the text for what it says, it's inserting a biased opinion into it to generate a new reading. Plus, it makes perfect sense that he would lie in this instance - they won't recognise him as an apostle, so he won't recognise them in return.
                    I believe you. Not everyone is intelligent enough or educated enough to see through your dishonest baloney.
                    Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Aractus View Post
                      the Jews and the early Christian church did not have the standard of truth that we expect today.
                      Meaning what? That they didn't have our ability to distinguish truth from falsehood? Or that truth meant something different to them than it does to us?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Post
                        Paul says it's ok to lie as long as you're lying for Jesus.

                        "But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice. Yes, and I will continue to rejoice,"
                        http://biblehub.com/philippians/1-18.htm
                        Incorrect. The word translated as "false motive," or "pretense" is prophasis, which means pretext or an outward showing. It does not reflect lies in content, but lies in motive. Paul is speaking of the motives of the preachers, not of the substance of their preaching. It is in contrast to his warnings about those who preach "another gospel" (II Corinthians 11:4; Galatians 1:8) so in effect he is saying that it doesn't matter what their incentive is as long as they are speaking the true gospel.

                        IOW, one can still get a true Gospel message unwittingly from a charlatan and salvation is more important than the bad habits of the messenger.

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                          I think you are overlooking the possibility that the Last Supper was actually an invention of Paul.

                          I suggest:
                          1. There was no historical event corresponding to the Last Supper as we know it today, and the historical Jesus never uttered any words about bread and wine being his body and blood and never instituted any form of communal meal or remembrance of him.
                          2. Paul had a spiritual vision in which Jesus revealed to Paul the idea of the Last Supper and of the Eucharist/Communion as we know it today, as he says in his letter (i.e. he is not lying).
                          3. Paul spread that teaching around all the churches that he visited and founded.
                          4. Such visions were a common way of early Christians learning 'facts' about Jesus and getting 'teachings' from Jesus.
                          5. By the time the gospels were written, this idea of a Last Supper and Jesus saying words about the bread and wine being his body and blood were all but universal around the churches, thus the gospels included the event as fact, when it had in fact originated in Paul's vision.
                          I think the Last Supper is based on a meal Jesus had with his disciples. I don't think he said "this is my blood of the new covenant", or "this is my body", or "do this in remembrance of me". I think there was a supper, none of that happened, but the disciples started practising it as a ritual and that's how it was practised. Because they practised it that way they projected their practise onto remembered history. Perhaps "Peter" or one of the women invented it the way it appears in the Bible. But there's just no way for Paul to have invented it. And he wouldn't have invented something that involved the original disciples and not him.

                          As to the rest of your points, psstein adequately addressed them. Paul claims to receive things by "revelation", perhaps by prayer, or meditation, or prophecy. But he doesn't claim that he has visions. He claims to have had one single vision of Jesus, and I suspect he may have been motivated to lie about that.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Aractus View Post
                            I'm not pretending anything. The friend I was talking to agreed AFTER I showed him the verse that Paul did not learn about the last supper directly from the Lord, he had to have learned it from the other disciples. Their argument is that the verse can be interpreted to mean he received it from the Lord through the work of the other apostles. But that doesn't make sense, in that whole section in Corinthians Paul is asserting his own authority above that and separate to the other apostles. Plus that explanation is not taking the text for what it says, it's inserting a biased opinion into it to generate a new reading. Plus, it makes perfect sense that he would lie in this instance - they won't recognise him as an apostle, so he won't recognise them in return.
                            I've seen that kind of game played a few times ... Paul claimed to have received something - The detractor claims that Paul claims he learned about that something. It occurs to me to wonder if another apostle (Barnabas, Sylas, Timothy come to mind) who had not seen Christ during his earthly mission, speaking Koine Greek and not English, might have been entitled to make the same claim.
                            1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                            .
                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                            Scripture before Tradition:
                            but that won't prevent others from
                            taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                            of the right to call yourself Christian.

                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              Incorrect. The word translated as "false motive," or "pretense" is prophasis, which means pretext or an outward showing. It does not reflect lies in content, but lies in motive. Paul is speaking of the motives of the preachers, not of the substance of their preaching. It is in contrast to his warnings about those who preach "another gospel" (II Corinthians 11:4; Galatians 1:8) so in effect he is saying that it doesn't matter what their incentive is as long as they are speaking the true gospel.

                              IOW, one can still get a true Gospel message unwittingly from a charlatan and salvation is more important than the bad habits of the messenger.
                              Yup! He has been told, but continues to . . . umm . . . deny the facts.
                              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Aractus View Post
                                I think the Last Supper is based on a meal Jesus had with his disciples. I don't think he said "this is my blood of the new covenant", or "this is my body", or "do this in remembrance of me". I think there was a supper, none of that happened, but the disciples started practising it as a ritual and that's how it was practised. Because they practised it that way they projected their practise onto remembered history. Perhaps "Peter" or one of the women invented it the way it appears in the Bible. But there's just no way for Paul to have invented it. And he wouldn't have invented something that involved the original disciples and not him.

                                As to the rest of your points, psstein adequately addressed them. Paul claims to receive things by "revelation", perhaps by prayer, or meditation, or prophecy. But he doesn't claim that he has visions. He claims to have had one single vision of Jesus, and I suspect he may have been motivated to lie about that.
                                A far less convoluted theory is that that there was a meal, and the gospels accurately describe the way it went down.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                14 responses
                                42 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                78 responses
                                411 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X